repo-audit

Deep analysis of Git history: identify frequently changed hotspot files, analyze code ownership by contributor, and scan for leaked secrets. Triggered when users ask about Git analysis, code hotspots, who owns what code, secret scanning, security audits of commit history, or optimizing code review assignments.

Quality

82%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

High

Do not use without reviewing

Quality

Content

72%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is well-structured and actionable as a tool reference with good progressive disclosure into the bundle scripts. It loses points on workflow clarity for lacking sequencing and validation checkpoints around the batch history-scanning operations.

Suggestions

Add one or two worked example invocations per script with real argument values (e.g. 'bash scripts/hotfiles.sh --repo ./myrepo --top 10 --since 2024-01-01') to move actionability from concrete to copy-paste ready.

Add a short workflow section sequencing the three tools (e.g. scan hotspots → check ownership of hotspots → secret-scan before deploy) with a validation checkpoint such as confirming the repo path is a valid git repository before running.

Trim the 'Use Cases' section or fold it into the description's triggers to remove redundancy with the frontmatter and tighten conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean reference material (usage blocks, option tables, dependencies) with no padding about concepts Claude already knows, but the 'Use Cases' section partially re-states triggers already in the description, a minor trim opportunity that keeps it below 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides concrete invocations ('bash scripts/hotfiles.sh [options]') and complete option tables with defaults, but never shows a worked example with real argument values, the minor gap that prevents a 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Per-tool usage and options are clear, but there is no overall sequence for using the three tools together and no validation/verification checkpoints; because history scanning is a batch operation, the missing-validation cap holds this at 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is an overview pointing one level deep to real, clearly signaled bundle scripts (scripts/hotfiles.sh, ownership.sh, secret-scan.sh, all present), with detailed logic appropriately split out of SKILL.md, matching the clear-overview anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

92%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is strong: concrete capabilities, an explicit trigger clause, and a distinct Git-history niche. Its only weak spot is trigger-term breadth, where a few common synonyms are missing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists three concrete, distinct actions — 'identify frequently changed hotspot files', 'analyze code ownership by contributor', and 'scan for leaked secrets' — giving comprehensive coverage of the skill's capabilities, matching the score-5 anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor at 4.	5 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly states what the skill does and follows with a 'Triggered when users ask about...' clause listing concrete triggers, mirroring the score-5 example structure; not 4 because both what and when are concrete and explicit.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Strong natural phrasing ('code hotspots', 'who owns what code', 'secret scanning', 'security audits of commit history') but a few natural synonyms users might say are absent (e.g. 'git blame', 'code churn', 'tech debt'), placing it just below the comprehensive-coverage anchor at 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear Git-history-analysis niche with distinct, specific triggers that are unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the clear-niche/minimal-conflict anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: zebbern/claude-code-guide
Path: skills/repo-audit/SKILL.md
Commit: 9d252b3

Reviewed: 2 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.